2012 was a good year for Prenda Law. The law firm raked in at least $1.9 million by sending thousands of letters alleging that Internet users had illegally downloaded pornographic films.

In August of that year, Prenda was feeling so good about itself that it made a particularly bold move. The law firm actually sued two of the nation's biggest Internet service providers, AT&T and Comcast, frustrated that the ISPs wouldn't hand over subpoenas seeking the identities of some 6,600 people. The bizarrely worded complaint alleged that the ISPs had "aided and abetted" hackers who gained entry to porn websites owned by Lightspeed Media, an adult content company that was then a Prenda client.

But it was really all about discovery—that is, getting the names of users. As AT&T's lawyer explained to the judge:

As elsewhere, Lightspeed and its attorneys would have this Court act as the instrument for its collection activity on a grand scale without regard to whether Lightspeed has asserted any viable claims, and without regard to the substantive and procedural rights of the ISPs or their subscribers… Presumably, Lightspeed is merely searching for any sort of relief that could result in the collection of more settlements before any judicial scrutiny and adversarial debate in this Court.

Even back then, close Prenda watchers saw a lawsuit against such large targets ending badly. Suing AT&T and Comcast was a "strategic blunder," as Prenda was provoking "sleeping giants" who really didn't have a dog in the fight until that point, noted Ars writer Tim Lee.

The move showed signs of backfiring early. The judge quickly agreed to AT&T's request to stay discovery. Meanwhile, by early 2013, Prenda's business was collapsing. The firm was ultimately hit with serious sanctions in a Los Angeles case. With discovery stayed and trouble on the horizon elsewhere, Prenda predictably lost interest in the case. It dismissed the suit in March.

That wasn't the end of it, however. In the original complaint, Lightspeed had accused a particular user, Anthony Smith, of hacking its websites. Prenda dropped the case, but Smith's lawyers went on the counterattack. Two weeks after the case was dismissed, Smith filed a motion asking for attorneys' fees. Lightspeed and Prenda had pursued lawsuits as a lark, Smith said, using "unreasonable and vexatious" litigation to simply get the names of people they could threaten.

Prenda had "no valid claims to stand behind" and the whole lawsuit was "a pretext for pursuing non-parties" that warranted sanctions.

Seven months later, Smith's motion has been approved, and Prenda will be punished by having to pay attorneys' fees—yet again.

"The litigation smacked of bullying pretense," wrote US District Judge G. Patrick Murphy in yesterday's order, which asks for a precise fee request to be submitted by next week. "Plaintiff raised baseless claims despite knowledge those claims were frivolous and pressed for a meritless ‘emergency’ discovery hearing."

This is the fifth known case in which Prenda has been ordered to pay fees. The first, second, third, and fourth instances total more than $176,000, not including interest. In this case, Smith's lawyers, Dan Booth and Jason Sweet, have estimated their client's fees to be about $70,000.

These guys pretty much are a textbook example of what happens when you have a license to practice law, an ego the size of Cleveland, and a few initial successes. Any kind of sense of having a nagging self-doubt gets shoved aside, with the assumption that anything they want to have happen will happen. Other lawyers, judges, and the law in general are no match for their self-confidence!

I'd really love to get an inside look at what these guys are thinking now. Are they still cocksure about being right, assuming that eventually some judge is going to recognize their awesomeness? Or has any self-doubt been allowed to enter their minds?

Good job Prenda, you've managed to anger about every major law and corporate entity you've had dealings with. You've set the bar so high with fail that I look forward to your next attempt at raising it.

Been using Comcast for years. We have a bit of a love/hate relationship.

They adopted their "educational" antipiracy waring system, but they've taken no notice of me. Of course, I encrypt traffic and stick to fansubbed obscure animes that haven't been released over here.

Nor have they taken any notice in the TOR exit relay I've been running for a few years, as far as I can tell.

They bumped me up to a higher tier without asking and added 20 bucks to my bill. I'm pleased with the speed, but I really wish they had asked first. Also, they threw in some cable channels for free, but as TV rots the brain, I haven't even unboxed the digital tuner they sent me. I'm not sure how my bill would be affected if I returned the thing and cancelled the bundle in favor of just the internet service. Their billing seems to defy logic.

$1.9M in settlement awards - ~$240k in fees = still a fuck-ton of money. They're still making out like bandits and their game was largely successful.

Awaiting the IRS involvement.

Until then, they're laughing all the way to their bank(s) in the Virgins.

Well, $240k against no revenue in the last few months. It's a start. But every judgment is another mark against their ever practicing law again. And every case seems to see some explosive affidavit - like the ones showing Steele is the apparent seeder of the files himself, and that financial spreadsheet showing how involved S&H are. Those are the real meat and potatoes here, and the things that will help the alphabet soup of agencies really dig their claws in.

$1.9M in settlement awards - ~$240k in fees = still a fuck-ton of money. They're still making out like bandits and their game was largely successful.

Until then, they're laughing all the way to their bank(s) in the Virgins.

And that's the biggest problem here that nobody is talking about. I'm really happy to see Prenda getting smacked down, but nobody is mentioning the number one reason that Prenda's scheme worked in the first place -- the absurdly high cost of defending yourself from frivolous and predatory lawsuits.

Look at the case of one of the people who fought back against Prenda -- "Smith's lawyers, Dan Booth and Jason Sweet, have estimated their client's fees amount to be about $70,000." What in the world could they have possibly done to justify $70,000 in fees? There is just no legitimate reason for it.

This is the number one reason why Prenda and others have been able to successfully run their "Pay me or else" scam for so long..

All I want for Christmas is a RICO indictment of Prenda. IRS involvement will be the ribbon around the package.

Given that last sentence in the quote from the ruling:

Quote:

Presumably, Lightspeed is merely searching for any sort of relief that could result in the collection of more settlements before any judicial scrutiny and adversarial debate in this Court.

The judge is well aware of what's going on. I can't see how, if the allegations that they uploaded some or all of the videos in question themselves have any merit, this isn't going to turn into a criminal extortion case against some or all of the people behind Prenda.

Look at the case of one of the people who fought back against Prenda -- "Smith's lawyers, Dan Booth and Jason Sweet, have estimated their client's fees amount to be about $70,000." What in the world could they have possibly done to justify $70,000 in fees? There is just no legitimate reason for it.

Errr, I dunno about that. Doing litigation right in the big leagues means MANY, many hours of research in addition to the actual court time. It's not that hard to imagine a couple of lawyers spending a substantive portion of three months on this case and using a substantive amount of the time of a few paralegals or interns as well; that kind of thing can add up to $70K quite quickly.

The really bothersome thing here is that Prenda's getting hit with damages that IN TOTAL are about equivalent to the damages Jammie Thomas was originally hit with. Jammie Thomas never made a couple of million bucks preying on people before she was asked to cough up a quarter-million bucks, and it only took a single suit to hit her with that amount. OTOH you've got Prenda both ruining people's lives AND clogging up the taxpayer-paid courts for YEARS while extracting tons of money... and similar damages?

Something's really, REALLY rotten in the state of Denmark.

And, yeah, I think we all realize that the story's not over for Prenda. On the other hand, if Steele and Thomas had the brains god gave a lemming, they'd long since have just gathered up what remains of the millions they extorted - 85% or more of which is untouched by the courts - and get the hell out of the country never to come back. Why they STILL haven't done so is frankly beyond me (though I'm grateful for it).

What in the world could they have possibly done to justify $70,000 in fees? There is just no legitimate reason for it.

Litigation, particularly that in federal court is expensive. Say his lawyers charge $300/hour, which is very reasonable (experienced litigators often charge $500-$1000), then we are talking 230 hours total spent on this. I would say they spent 40 hours researching the complaint, conferring with the client regarding goals strategies, and drafting an answer to complaint.

In addition, I can see that 65 documents have been filed in this case so I am going to assume there were at least two motions if not more. Each requiring likely another 40 hours worth of work each. I would also say over the course of the year, the attorneys spent another 40 hours monitoring the case and conducting further research. Finally say 10 hours of hearing times (you pay for the time the attorneys spend waiting in the courtroom doing nothing) for each attorney.

That is what 180 hours without knowing more info, or taking into account any expenses or paralegal fees.

For even the most basic federal case, expect to pay for at least 6 weeks of full time work for however many attorney's are on your case for a trial alone. Ignoring what you have already spent getting to that point. For only two attorneys (and most cases require more) that is 480 hours alone, or about $150,000 just for the trial.

Don't forget that the $1.9M is what they chose to record on a financial sheet just for Prenda Law, and just for the year 2012.

Some extortion letters asked for cashier's checks or wire payments made out only to "Owner", whoever that is. Would their criminal minds find a good reason to record such semi-anonymous money on the books?

I'm really rather surprised that AT&T and Comcast counsel comes so cheap, "only" $70 grand... You have to say that Prenda got off lucky this time. Not that there's any chance anyone will collect that money off of the parties involved; these pornster shysters should have gotten out while the getting was good, and by now they're probably either flat-out broke or have squirreled away their money where it's unlikely anyone else will be able to get to it...

I'm really rather surprised that AT&T and Comcast counsel comes so cheap, "only" $70 grand... You have to say that Prenda got off lucky this time. Not that there's any chance anyone will collect that money off of the parties involved; these pornster shysters should have gotten out while the getting was good, and by now they're probably either flat-out broke or have squirreled away their money where it's unlikely anyone else will be able to get to it...

The $70,000 is not AT&T and Comcast's counsel; it's counsel for Anthony Smith, who (apparently; the article does a poor job of explaining) is a private individual with no connection to AT&T or Comcast.

Look at the case of one of the people who fought back against Prenda -- "Smith's lawyers, Dan Booth and Jason Sweet, have estimated their client's fees amount to be about $70,000." What in the world could they have possibly done to justify $70,000 in fees? There is just no legitimate reason for it.

This is the number one reason why Prenda and others have been able to successfully run their "Pay me or else" scam for so long..

Yup, that's pretty much right. The cost of defense is pretty insane. I was on the receiving end of a lawsuit (person fell in my parking lot, winter, Michigan and I had plenty of receipts for lot plowing services). They wanted $400,000 for a fractured thumb, wound up costing me $17,000 to defend, and then wound up settling for $2500. So - it cost me $20,000 because someone didn't think there might be a bit of ice in a parking lot in Michigan in March. And yes, the lighting was fine.

Defending even a simple case can be ruinous - something that requires a lot of research? Even more so.

As for the Prenda assclowns, they have a saying: When you find yourself in a hole, quit digging. They didn't learn that one (to our continuing enjoyment over their continuing comeuppance).

$1.9M in settlement awards - ~$240k in fees = still a fuck-ton of money. They're still making out like bandits and their game was largely successful.

Awaiting the IRS involvement.

Until then, they're laughing all the way to their bank(s) in the Virgins.

Yeah, I've been wondering where all that money is. Prenda's guys have been saying that they don't have the money to pay the fees and judgements. Usually the court will appoint Marshall's to retrieve their cars, boats, and even houses in states where that is allowed.

They should be charged with extortion and tried it's a hell of a lot more than they gave their victims. They all deserve prison time for their F'd up game. They used this data to call people, threaten them public humiliation, and led them into believing it would be far more costly to actually fight.

The worst part is Comcast pretty much been proved they were uploading torrents themselves to bait people.

I can imagine that prenda isnt planing to pay any of these legal fees, but if the opposing lawyers are smart, which they seem to be, they'll follow the path taken by Marc Randazza in the Righthaven case, which was to ask the court to have the US Marshall's collect the fees for him, since Righthaven refused to pay.